Saturday, October 8, 2011

Andrew the Atheist warns against mocking the SMAD

Yes, it's true.  I'm mocking belief with this SMAD thing.  But I'm doing so to make a point.  I think it is valid and a very true analogy.  In the last post I made, I turned all the apologetics around to favor the argument for the existence of the Super Mega Awesome Dragon instead of your god.  The point is that these arguments can easily be used to argue for the existence of OTHER gods BESIDES the christian god, and therefore fail to prove the existence of any specific god. 

Further, we've covered this before.  When you, Tim, first called upon the Design Argument, I objected because I asserted you do not believe in your god because of this argument.  I further asserted that NO ONE believes because of these arguments.  You'll remember:  you conceded this point.  You admit these are NOT convincing arguments, and yet you are still trying to use them.  Then you have the nerve to say that I am being silly for continuing with the argument from SMAD.  But you have yet to disprove SMAD.

But here's an interesting phenomena:  when I asserted there is a dragon in my pants, you didn't believe me.  You asked for evidence!  Congratulations!!  You have agreed that disbelief is indeed the default position.  Of course it is.  You have no positive evidence that the dragon is real, and therefore, you feel there is no rational reason for believing the dragon exists.  You are an atheist in regards to my dragon. 

Now, I'm going to tell you that I have indeed felt the dragon's presence in my life.  I have already asserted that I can hear the dragon roar.  I can smell the dragon's stinky breath.  You can too.  These events are common and easily reproduced.  I can make the dragon roar just by praying to it.  It's roar is recordable, and can be studied scientifically.  There is tangible, recordable, measurable, physical evidence of this dragon.  This is WAY more than what we have for a god, and yet you STILL don't believe I have a dragon in my pants, do you?

Why not?   Don't you trust me?  You say faith is really trust.  So trust me.  Trust that I believe there is a dragon in my pants.  Trust that it is really there.  Trust that there is a SMAD, that Godzilla is green and invisible, that the Dragonzord waits to punish non-believers, that the Loch Ness Monster was the last true prophet of SMAD.  Have faith.  You can even hope if you like.  Hope to escape the fires of the Dragonzord.  Hope Nessie will bear the weight of your dragon sins.  Hope for the SMAD to be real.  Does this sound delusional yet?

Now, I have also asked you to disprove SMAD.  When you can, I'll just use your method to disprove your god. Until then, by your logic, and your positions, you should believe the SMAD exists.  You have no way to show it does not.  I have provided evidence it exists.  So it should be more rational to believe the SMAD is real than to be an atheist in regards to SMAD.  You don't think so?  Why not?  I assert it is only because your god claims are more familiar than the dragon claims.  While they both hold as much weight as each other, you find your beliefs to be rational only because they are more familiar, not because they are actually rational.

Now, to show how belief in irrational things is harmful to society:

Imagine I am a member of government.  Imagine I want to pass legislation that allows for SMAD doctrine to be taught in science class along with real science.  Imagine I think that universe was created when the SMAD laid an egg and out hatched the universe.  I want this theory to be taught as an alternative to evolution.  Is this detrimental to society?

Imagine I am a leader of a congregation of draconists.  Imagine I tell my congregation to vote for a particular candidate because they will uphold traditional draconian principles. I want to elect people who will acknowledge this is a draconian nation and it was built on the basic tenants of SMAD law.  Would this be beneficial?

Imagine I am a parent who has young children.  I want my kids to also know SMAD's eternal love and be saved from the Dragonzord.  I tell my kids that they must adhere to the strict teachings of the SMAD, or the Dragonzord will rise up and get them.  I tell my young kids that the Drgonzord wants to torture them for all eternity if they turn from the teachings of the SMAD.  Is this good for kids to hear?

I tell people that the Dragonzord is going to destroy the world.  I tell them that to stop this from happening, they must commit vile acts of violence and evil.  They do so.  Is this helpful?

I sell people dragon blood, which will cure all diseases from cancer to herpes to headaches to small penis size.  People buy the stuff by the truckload.  I make billions of dollars each year which I use to further the dragonic causes in politics and government.  Am I helping?

By the way, I do not have the ability to remove comments from this blog, nor would I do so if I had the power.  I'd like to thank the Human Ape for joining us.  In case you all haven't noticed, I'm ignoring all anonymous comments.  If I had control over the comments, I'd require a login for comments to post, but I don't. 
Oh, and that reminds me.  If you get offended by profanity, then you can just fuck off.  Grow a fucking pair and get the fuck over it.  Fuck.  Fuckity.  Fuckwhat.  Fucknuggets.  FucktuesdayFuckhammer.


  1. For someone who claims to have debated many Theists before, it is hard to believe the absurdities on this blog.

    Andrew is not doing any thinking of his own, he claims his abundant knowledge and being tired of hearing the same apologetic from the Christian sides. Well, the same can be said, the dragon example is very commonly used, in fact, Google "The Dragon In My Garage by Carl Sagan".

    If anyone finds this an intellectual conversation so be it. I personally think is a joke. If you really think that over the last 4000 years of bible historicity, billions of people compare to a well documented factual dragon, then you are very much lost.

    Again, Andrew fails to mention anything with any substance, all he does is mention how he doesn't like God, how he would be detrimental etc. Do you guys not see anything detrimental about evolution at all? Well maybe you should check out recent school shootings.

    Aww, did Andrew just said that he is a big man and that he has a pair, just because he went on a cursing rant?

    The good thing so far is that Atheists that agree with Andrew have shown ability to believe in the supernatural. Now that you at least claim that dragons (by definition something imaginary) exists, then well, you must at least agree that God does exists, well maybe the discussion can be moved as to why the God of the bible makes more sense than the dragon is his pants/garage/bedroom, wherever he keeps it.

  2. So If someone writes about a dragon in their pants 4000 years ago on a tablet then 4000 years later, tablet is discovered and it becomes fact.

  3. again, it isn't one tablet, it is multiple books, thousands of scrolls, many people who actually suffered martyrdom for what they knew was true. If you think this is the same, then stay Atheist.

  4. also in case you don't know, Jesus actually lived about 2000 years ago. He wasn't just an anecdote in a table, or a made up dragon. But hey you say the evidence is all the same.

  5. I think what is making me alternately giggle and shake my head is Anonymous. I love how my name is mocked in a previous posting, coming from someone who mocks us all from the "Neener, neener, you crybabies" standpoint all whilst hiding behind an anonymous label and acting childish while acting in the same manner. That must projection has *got* to hurt!

    Onward, *brave* Christian soldier!

    I have been reading along, but have to say that it is pointless to "debate" those of faith, as it inevitably falls to this: moving of goalposts, resurrecting fallacious arguments that have been laid aside, and inequitable talking points.

    Andrew, now you know why PZ refuses to do these kinds of things anymore.

  6. you mocked the fact that people used anonymous before. I simply replied. "Human Ape Along for the Ride" is just as anonymous and oh not to brave either, unless that's your real name.

    it has nothing to do with being brave, tackle the facts and not the writer.

    One thing we do agree is that it is pointless to debate Atheists also. I'm not here debate you, but to show how inaccurate you are.

  7. "If you really think that over the last 4000 years of bible historicity"

    the bible is literally chocked full of historical inaccuracies, geographical errors, erroneous claims, and contradictory claims of all shapes and sizes concerning a great number of things

    "Jesus actually lived about 2000 years ago."

    really well then how come there is no contemporaneous extra biblical account of jesus
    during his alleged life?

    this is suspect to say the least especially given how much history from that period is well documented

    why is there no mention of that guy
    and why are all of the biblical accounts all written well after his alleged death

    i am sorry i am just not buying it

  8. Please mention these inaccuracies, please something that is substantial and not just things you copy and paste from an atheist source.

    First of all, there wasn't a bible, the books were found, the historical records of Jesus were found and compiled into the bible. The bible isn't one book, is a compilation of many.

    Not many people had access to write in those days, thats why they had scribes, but Roman historian Tacitus mentions Jesus, Jewish historian Josephus mentions Jesus, LUCIAN, Talmud and about hundreds of Scholars.

    Accounts written well after his death. Do you guys do any research? We have writings close to about 30 years after his death. Again, they didn't have the internet in those in case you didn't know. Papyrus was expensive and even harder to find literate people.

    The writers of the new testament were witnesses and interviewed many others that were still alive when the events occurred.

    All this doesn't matter because it just will not be enough evidence for you. The issue is that your presuppositions will not allow you to believe it.

  9. about hundreds of Scholars agree with the accuracy and the historicity of a real man named Jesus*

  10. [Citation Needed]
    [Citation Needed]
    [Citation Needed]

  11. Howdy, Human Ape!! I haven't replied to your posts yet, so it's about time I do so. I understand why PZ doesn't do these debates. I think it has more to do with the fact he is inundated with silly arguments all the time. I don't have that burden, so I can take the time.

    The anonymous troll is indeed funny. The real reason I ignore all the anonymous posts is because there is more than one person posting anonymously. I can't have a conversation that way. I need to be able to identify the other person. But if someone wants to rant and post without signing, that's fine. It would seem more productive for that person to post their own blog, but I guess then they'd have to sign it.

  12. Signing up for an account via one of the various options given here simply so one can post in a thread is a needlessly tedious waste of time.
    I think rather than doing that I will simply stop bothering to read this blog altogether.


  14. about hundreds of Scholars agree with the accuracy and the historicity of a real man named Jesus[citation needed]
    Probably one of those bible scholars...

  15. Dragon Zord in battle mode reporting in...

  16. Atheists can't disprove a god. Therefore a God MUST exists. Music, you can't see it, its just there in the air, you don't even know it. You can BREATH air.. But you can't see it... Does air exist. Atheist logic is clearly flawed!

  17. Oh right, a scholar is only a REAL scholar is he is an Atheist right?

    Same way a scientist is a REAL scientist if he believes in evolution.

    Man, some people need to start doing some critical thinking...

  18. A biblical scholar is to any other scholar like a special Olympian is to an Olympian.

  19. "A biblical scholar is to any other scholar like a special Olympian is to an Olympian."

    I, Godzilla, destroyer of Tokyo, the King of all Monsters, find this rude and offensive. The mere idea of thinking you can compare a Biblical Scholar to a Special Olympian is insulting in all ways, shapes and forms.

    Special Olympians get shit done at least.

  20. I can't really take Tim seriously.. This is a guy overly concerned about what Justin Bieber does with his penis.